Power steering adds 150 pounds?!!
- Thread starter TURBO2GO
- Start date
- Joined
- 20 January 2004
- Messages
- 722
I thought it was 34 additional lbs, maybe i'm mistaken? I have a spare EPS rack, considering that virtually everything is self contained in the electric rack, if I weigh it and we subtract the weight of a manual rack, that should be the difference, with the exception of the control box.
I'm sure you can swap to an earlier manual rack, but having had both I prefer the EPS, regardless of weight differences. The pwr rack does not require that much less effort than the manual rack, so steering still feels weighted and accurate IMO, and one of the EPS's modes, kickback, I find very usefull. I feel that it makes the car easier to catch when it gets crossed up, and decreases the chance of the driver over-compensating and having the car now transfer motion too much in the other direction and possibly spinning. Considering how twitchy the rear of these cars can be at times, it seems to offer some help.
I'm sure you can swap to an earlier manual rack, but having had both I prefer the EPS, regardless of weight differences. The pwr rack does not require that much less effort than the manual rack, so steering still feels weighted and accurate IMO, and one of the EPS's modes, kickback, I find very usefull. I feel that it makes the car easier to catch when it gets crossed up, and decreases the chance of the driver over-compensating and having the car now transfer motion too much in the other direction and possibly spinning. Considering how twitchy the rear of these cars can be at times, it seems to offer some help.
Dave, keep the EPS (it's very low to the ground) and remove your Comptech engine cover (for the targa top) which is higher off the ground. It will offset some of that 30+ pounds that the EPS adds... and your car will look better (IMO). :wink:
150lbs is entirely non-realistic.
The difference in weight between a basic coupe manual rack- and the later electric rack with the power assist ball screw, the EPS Computer, the EPS power module, and wires in the loom is likely right around the quoted 34lbs or so.
Notable, but being as everything sits low to the floor of the car and more or less in the middle of it... and it serves a more useful purpose to the driver... the Targa cover and other items most definitely are far more significant IMO as well and should come first as a matter of priority as already mentioned.
The difference in weight between a basic coupe manual rack- and the later electric rack with the power assist ball screw, the EPS Computer, the EPS power module, and wires in the loom is likely right around the quoted 34lbs or so.
Notable, but being as everything sits low to the floor of the car and more or less in the middle of it... and it serves a more useful purpose to the driver... the Targa cover and other items most definitely are far more significant IMO as well and should come first as a matter of priority as already mentioned.
http://www.nsxprime.com/FAQ/General/modelinfo/zanardi.htm
Zanardi Performance Modifications...............................................................Weight difference ( lb )
Manual rack-and-pinion steering (Electric Power Steering deleted)......................-32
Zanardi Performance Modifications...............................................................Weight difference ( lb )
Manual rack-and-pinion steering (Electric Power Steering deleted)......................-32
Last edited:
32 lbs is 32 lbs. If you're on a diet, and you can handle not having EPS - I don't see why not.
John - you haven't done yours yet? I'm surprised...
John - you haven't done yours yet? I'm surprised...
- Joined
- 20 January 2004
- Messages
- 722
The manual rack swap has been done before, but this might be the first '02+ if Dave does it. Nice to see I was only 2 lbs off, I can't guess my wife's weight with that margin of error.
DON'T EVER LET HER KNOW THAT !!!! (I suggest you edit your post and delete that)
:biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin:
Just did a manual rack replacement for EPS rack. I need to fight my steering wheel a bit in corners, but otherwise I'm happy with the results. I can attest to the 32 extra pounds effort it took to lift the old unit out of my trunk.:biggrin: Pull out the spare and put in a lightweight battery and you've cut 50+ lbs in the front.
Another point to consider-- manual rack can be rebuilt/refurbished or to replaced new (parts) for about 600-700 bucks compared to $4200-$5200 for the EPS rack. How long will EPS racks even be available for purchase?
Another point to consider-- manual rack can be rebuilt/refurbished or to replaced new (parts) for about 600-700 bucks compared to $4200-$5200 for the EPS rack. How long will EPS racks even be available for purchase?
- Joined
- 20 January 2004
- Messages
- 722
That's the main reason I just bought a spare. BTW a LW battery, 86ing the spare/brkt, and converting to manual steering will remove more like 75 lbs off the front, though these cars can benefit a bit more from wt reduction in the rear of course.
UnhuZ...the chance of my wife logging onto Prime to read posts is about as slim as me joining the Polar Bear Club.
Dave,
No, no, and no IMHO
Not worth removing it. Having power steering is a big plus imho, you can drive the car with 1 finger. That is 32lb I wouldn't mind adding to my NSX if I can get power steering.
I am a diet freak but, if I have power steering on the car, I wouldn't touch it for sake of weight saving.
You can trim weight from so many other areas. Having power steering just make the car feels lighter than it actually is at slow speed. My Supra at 3500lbs felt lighter than my NSX at slow speed.
Many disagree but, I have driven so many different NSXes, it matters no matter how strong you are. Effortless is a good thing. On the BestMotoring video back in 1999, Ganson's Son's comment after driving the silver NA1 NSX in a small course test is "difficult", "heavy", "You need more effort to turn it", "NSX not suitable for racing". He said nothing but bad things about the steering.
Last edited:
We all know how important it is to drive at slow speed... :tongue:
I understand your point of view, really; but unless you are a car park attendent, steering response at slow speed is about the last thing to worry about. However, I have seen some persuasive arguments for the power rack on the track (fighting bump steer, etc.). Had the EPS rack used a quicker ratio, I think there would be more universal enthusiasm for it. As it is, the manual rack is only marginally more difficult to drive at slow speed. Given that, I'd argue that disposing of EPS in lieu of 32 lbs for someone inclined to cut weight is perfectly acceptable. Not to mention that 1/3 to 1/2 of NSX in the US have manual racks-- so it can't be all that bad.:smile:
I kinda like the non power steering. :biggrin: Tough to get used to at first and people tend to look at you funny while trying to manuever:wink:
Randy,
I have to agree with Jason on this one. I admit, I see what your saying, but in this instance, I believe it's up to the individual driver as to how they drive and what they want. Just because I drive a supercharged NSX doesn't mean I'm all about speed... sometimes (heck, most of the time) I drive like a 57 year old aerospace engineer. :biggrin:
Steve
I agree as well that this is a matter of driver preference. Though to me, this implies that either approach is a valid solution for a particular preference be it weight reduction or EPS steering response.
I have yet to drive my NSX with manual steering on the track, so I won't presume to have an opinion on high speed handling.
The 150 lbs quote probably came from the difference between a ’94 and a ’95 NSX. I bought a ’94 in 1995 because of this weight issue. In 1995 Honda/Acura came out with the NSX T. In order to provide the T top, the chassis has to be beefed up. This added weight caused the need of the power steering. Although the beefed up on the chassis is only required for the T top, to simplify production all NSX including the coupe and T top has this beefed up chassis. The combined added weight of the chassis and the power steering on a ’95 over a ’94 is about 150 lbs. That was the reason that I forgo the ’95 and went for a ’94. The ’95 has the same engine as the ’94. It wasn’t until ’97 that Honda/Acura remedied this by increasing the engine size and bumped up the horse power.
The Zanardi edition was actually a combination of a ’94 chassis with the new engine and gearbox plus some tweaked settings and components.
I may be wrong here, but I don't think this statement is correct.
The Zanardi chassis and the chassis on the 1994 care not the same. Honda made some changes to the aluminum, etc. with the NA2 cars that resulted in lighter, stronger chassis. The Zanardi is a NA2 coupe with tweaked settings and components and not an NA1 coupe with tweaks.
Zanardi is a NA2 coupe (NOT na1 as stated above)
Power steering was not added due to extra weight. (not as stated above) EPS (electronic power steering) was added when honda had the ability to do so. This is the same system used on the s2000 and other honda's. The immobilizer was also first used on the 97 nsx and then later applied (and improved upon) on the s2000, accord etc.
Also the body panels on a nA2 (97+) are made out of a higher grade aluminum that is thinner and stronger. thus the NA2 coupe has the best of all worlds, stronger chassis, better body panels, best drive train, etc.
Power steering was not added due to extra weight. (not as stated above) EPS (electronic power steering) was added when honda had the ability to do so. This is the same system used on the s2000 and other honda's. The immobilizer was also first used on the 97 nsx and then later applied (and improved upon) on the s2000, accord etc.
Also the body panels on a nA2 (97+) are made out of a higher grade aluminum that is thinner and stronger. thus the NA2 coupe has the best of all worlds, stronger chassis, better body panels, best drive train, etc.
The Zanardi was a special run from the factory using the old chassis. The original chassis was designed and optimized with the aid of 2 Cray Computers. All post ’95 used the beefed up chassis. To get more performance for the Zanardi the easy way, Honda/Acura used the old chassis probably with some minor improvements. I used to subscribe to just about every auto magazine and had a habit of reading and comparing the specifications. Unless someone in the known can show me that I am wrong, I would still conclude that Zanardi used the ’94 chassis.
I don't think your information is correct.
As noted above, Honda changed the type of aluminum they were using beginning with the NA2 cars to a lighter, stronger aluminum. This was safer, lighter, and performed better. Honda didn't go back to the old aluminum and manufacturing process for the Zanardi coupes.
Instead, they used the NA1 coupe as the basis and added components and lost weight accordingly.
- Joined
- 20 January 2004
- Messages
- 722
Agreed, they didn't use the old body AFAIK, and the EPS wasn't fitted because added weight caused a need for it, you are forgetting that the automatic cars had pwr steering before they made any changes to the chassis.
Your logic is flawed! :wink:
Your logic is flawed! :wink:
Have you tried driving with the EPS turned off to see how you like or dislike the feel of the steering?
No. Are you saying unplug it?
Pull the fuse??? I think I'm going to remove mine here pretty soon for the weight savings and I like the way the steering feels too.:biggrin:
Similar threads
